How is life different for today’s young gay Mormons than it was for me 40 years ago?

Today’s LDS Church is not the LDS Church I grew up in. Today’s gay-aware world is certainly not the myopic straight world I grew up in.

In my growing up years, a Mormon did everything possible to distinguish himself from any other form of Christian. After all, Catholic and Protestant Churches were all apostate! Today, the church desperately wants to be thought of as a branch of the very Christianity they used to condescendingly disregard. It’s no wonder that those of us from those days who have left it end up atheists or at least unaffiliated without any specific religion.

As a young man grappling with homosexuality there was no such thing as an out gay Mormon. Gay wasn’t a noun. It was only considered an endurable, sinful verb. Today, there is a small but vocal segment of Mormon allies and even gay Mormons who accept homosexuality as an unchangeable state and yet find the capacity to struggle and contort themselves to stay LDS. I still can’t fathom operating the required mental and emotional gymnastics to accomplish that, but it is undeniably a thing now.

In the past, my LDS Mom and wife took on leadership roles without any real freedom or power to manage objectives and staffing. They were merely operation coordinators. Programs and processes were directives from the males above and local decisions required male approval thus effectively rendering their own decisions mute. I haven’t heard of any substantive changes in this regard but

As a teen, I’d never seen a homosexual portrayed on TV or in the movies. I’d heard that the 70’s sitcom Soap had a gay character, but we weren’t allowed to watch that show. Homosexuality was never discussed in my home or in church. In fact, I didn’t even know what the words “gay” or “homosexual” actually referred to until I was in the 5th or 6th grade. When I did learn what it meant, I suddenly had a name for how I felt and it still felt very “bad”, very foreign and very unfathomable. I just shamefully sensed that I was all that, and that my safety and the cure lied in the church.

These women are everything I dreamed my mother would have been. My own mother died before I came out. But had I any idea there were LDS women like Mama Dragons out there when I was a teen, I think I would have felt safe enough to come out earlier and thus prevent a whole slew of pain that later revealed itself on loved ones such as my ex-wife and kids. If you are one of our gay youth or the parent of one, talk to a Mama Dragon (You can e-mail them here: mamadragonstoryproject@gmail.com). I’ve met a couple of them in person and even as a 50 year old man, my soul is refreshed and I feel love from those women. These are people with a moral compass that elevates everyone they interact with. This is what love is.

There was a movement a few years ago called, “It Gets Better”. I’m here to testify that is IS better. It’s better today even while religious leaders still cling tight to archaic bronze age opinions. The world, American society and some in the LDS fringe community are better today than they were 40 years ago..

Me: Probably because his religion taught him to disrespect and be disgusted by gay people.

Daughter: So he’s Mormon?

(crickets…pick my jaw up from floor)

Me: …No, but many gays have died because of what Mormons teach about gays. This appears to be a Muslim terrorist.

To provide some context for that conversation, I don’t talk much about Mormonism with my kids, much less how it treats gays. Last November was the first and last time I remember having any type of discussion about it. This dialogue above was entirely unsolicited. It was a window into the experience of a teenage girl who has her own mind and her own observation skills.

She attends church and all the accompanying activities with her mother. With me she does not. How the two worlds intersect is her own interpretation.

But, if any of you doubt that I was speaking accurately in my response to her, here are a few facts… Mama Dragons, a group of Mormon mothers have documented 30+ suicides directly related to Mormons changing their policy towards gays since Nov. 2015.

The most well known murder of a young gay man, Matthew Shepard was committed by a pair of fellows, one of which was Mormon.

And with regards to terrorism, the worse terrorist attack on American soil before 9/11/2001 was committed by a band of Mormons in Southern Utah in 1857… also on September 11 ironically. 100-140 non Mormons were slaughtered at Mountain Meadows by Mormons who blamed it on the local Indians.

I’m not trying to say Mormons are somehow involved in this tragedy or that today’s Mormon is capable of the type of violence we saw in Orlando. But if a 12 year old Mormon girl can see the connection, surely we can agree that the environment fostered in Mormonism today towards gays is the beginning of something that festers into Orlando.

The fact that recent revelations show that the killer had been frequenting that bar and using gay dating apps convinces me even more that “horrifying violence starts as embers”

There have been various responses to the Orlando tragedy in blogs and on Facebook. Some of them discuss ISIS, Islam, gun legislation or lack thereof, love for others or lack thereof. Some seem to argue that we should forget all those details and that there’s just one lesson to be learned…Love.

Love.

I agree with that sentiment but I don’t think it occurs at the expense of dismissing all the facts in a tragedy like this. We need to know if it was a closeted, repressed gay man, who had been recruited by religious Islamic fundamentalists, who then resolved to attack others with an assault rifle, others who represented what he most hated about himself. That’s a lot of assumptions in that run-on sentence there I know, but that’s the way it’s shaping up at this point in time. We need to know all that because while you may not have been the shooter you may

I actually had someone I grew up with say that he’d “never heard a lesson in a Mormon church, taught about gays.”

If you are a current Mormon claiming to have never heard a lesson taught about gays you either need to wake up in meetings, you are completely clueless, or you are a liar. Just a simple Google search on homosexuality and Boyd K Packer, Spencer W Kimball, Prop 8 or Mormons will do the trick. If you don’t think those things are Orlando in embryo then you are part of the problem.

The religious fanaticism witnessed last weekend occurs in all religions as an observant pre-teen can figure out all on her own.

What does make it better is the growth that comes from understanding the problem mixed with love. I’ve fortunately heard and read those type of comments too. Lt Gov. Cox of Utah gave a somber, repentant speech acknowledging that he hasn’t always shown kindness and acceptance and that that’s part of the problem. I respect that and forgive him.

One of my favorite poets WH Auden wrote, “We must love one another or die” and that is what we affirm tonight. The brave kids that call for help and the adults who answer that call with love.

The horrifying violence starts as embers. In the last 6 months alone there have been over 106 anti-LGBT bills introduced in state legislatures. 34 States in all. Local control bills, anti-trans bills and the absurdly titled Religious Freedom bills.

We must love one another.

That’s the lens, the only lens. Not Red State Blue State. Not Federal Government versus State Government. No saying well that’s North Carolina or that’s Mississippi. No resting on the glory of being legally married.

Just as we would cover a baby with a blanket, we need to wrap all our kids everywhere in a loving embrace.

And that means making our world kinder and safer for them to come out to and join in.

So as we all leave tonight, let’s pledge to continue the project of Trevor – to keep our kids safe. Let’s pledge to share in the responsibility to fight every heinous bill everywhere, and to demand in word and deed respect, civility and fairness from our elected officials.

As usual I’m late to the party discussing the most recent Mormon revelation that legally married gay folks are automatically apostates and their children are ineligible for any sort of sacrament or ordinance. It was just a policy before this week and that gave level-headed progressive Mormons all the permission they needed to ignore it. I have several active Mormon friends who admitted as much to me.

Now with this latest announcement the policy has been elevated to “revelation.” In Mormons-speak that means all those progressive Mormons can’t rationalize away their complete dismissal of the policy. It was a very strong-handed chess move by Mormon leadership banking on the history that active members won’t remember any of the actual details of just a few months prior when it was just a policy hidden in a handbook update that was leaked and then was then clarified by an apostle and later the document was edited for clarification all without mentioning this supposed “revelation.”

Just to be clear, on a personal level I’m pissed that this didn’t happen 10 years ago when I was in a relationship and could have prevented my kids’ firm indoctrination into all things Mormon. That would have been awesome. I would have married the guy in a heartbeat, if that had been legal then, for that benefit alone. Now my oldest is on a mission and the other kids are left trying to process their own boredom with church, their father’s complete apostasy from it and their mother’s complete obsession with it.

But I didn’t even sit down today to talk about all that. I came to talk about a quirk of Mormon leadership decision-making.

Unanimity.

Unanimity was revealed by god (D&C 107:27, 29). That’s how this policy/revelation was supposedly approved by the full quorum. Ignoring all the holes in that story and the plain fact that I don’t believe Nelson’s telling of it, let’s assume that it was indeed unanimous.

Unanimous decision don’t necessarily mean there was full consensus. My study and experience tells me that unanimity is a symptom of a lack of courage, creativity and a process ripe with coercion. I’ve seen it in action in Mormon bishoprics, quorums and in Japanese corporate meetings.

I lived and worked in Japan. It’s an understatement to say that they have a different way of doing things over there. One hallmark of Japanese committee meetings is this idea that they won’t make a decision until it’s a unanimous one. It sounds all pretty cool and cumbaya-like but the reality that I experienced is far different. I saw a lot of intimidation and dismissal of alternate voices in such settings.

The leader, or someone with power over the group, walks into the meeting with a pre-determined conclusion. They present the topic and invite discussion. This is where it seems very fair and democratic. Before winding down, everyone is asked for their conclusion. The catch is that this summary process proceeds from the top down. The person with higher seniority or more power, or whatever, states their conclusion and the effect of that is to tell everyone else present how things are going to go. And it’s amazing to watch, but the rest of the committee just falls in line and agrees even though their initial opinion may have been contradictory.

It’s called the Abilene Paradox and it happens in American life too, on juries, in boardrooms and church quorums.

Social experiments show that this process is especially true when there is a clear hierarchical structure to the group. In other words, those higher up have a greater voice. They intimidate those below them to agree with their predetermined conclusion. Thus unanimity is reached, but not necessarily consensus.

I’ve seen this happen during church disciplinary councils and bishopric meetings. Once the leader states his opinion you see everyone else lie down and agree with it. In Mormonism where members are taught to sustain leaders, and that leaders are inspired, then this is almost instinctual.

Watch this video of Henry Eyring a current member of the LDS First Presidency describe this process. What he is calling a miracle is merely a sociological phenomenon of groups that require unanimity. Keep in mind that in a church setting no one is concerned about losing his job so the sharing of opinions portion is naturally freer than in a business setting. But the end result is the same…

Apparently, people conform for two main reasons: because they want to fit in with the group and because they believe the group is better informed than they are. So, just imagine that you are the newest apostle and the lowest man on the Q12 totem pole. You may voice your disagreement to a matter just to be heard and interject but when that last pass of voting happens you’ll more likely to agree to make it unanimous. That’s why the one guy in Eyring’s example gratefully whispered to President Lee. He knew the pressure would have been there for him to make the vote unanimous.

The more difficult the topic, the greater the likelihood of conformity.

When I see Russell Nelson describe Monson’s “revelation” and the Q12’s unanimous confirmation, I process a whole bunch of thoughts…

What other choice did a lessor member of the 12 have?

Apostles seem like corrupt police or the mafia. They’ll back up their own regardless of the facts.

I wonder what it’s like to be a newer apostle as they witness Nelson talk like this and know that he’s lying?

The Policy thing was a legalistic corporate decision, not a theological one as he’s trying to pretend.

A lot has been said recently about the Quorum of the 12’s age and homogeneity and how that results in late, out-of-date decisions and slow moving changes. But I’d submit that the lack of progress in the LDS Church is also firmly rooted in the culture of conformity and the dysfunctional decision-making process.

Lastly, for gay LDS men and women this should only solidify the clear writing on the wall that it’s time to get out. Stop whining about “struggles!” Go live your happy and full life. Don’t be like the kid in this video.

You’ve got your wide variety of drugs. Some people drink alcohol in excess. Some people are addicted to heroine, meth, crack cocaine, prescription pain killers. Some things like sex and food are wonderful in moderation, but they can be indulged in to such a time-consuming extreme that they become a drug as well.

Religion, especially Mormonism, falls in that mix of fairly harmless activities that at a fundamental extreme level become vices. Maybe it is worse because it’s sold and promoted in the name of truth and love – and it is condoned by the public as righteous.

The fact is that Mormonism divides people, steals their free will, suffocates creativity and expression, stifles passions, replaces “reason” with illusion, and casts a person’s mind/soul into voluntary bondage and servitude. Hence the danger: lured by love and truth into the cage, and then become a “soldier” to put the bars around everyone else.

At least the dangers of meth are advertised. At least the information is available to give meth users a viable “choice” on whether to use or not. Religion is inherited, and force fed to our children.

Religion is a drug. Like any drug, it will help you escape from reality. It will take away some of the perceived “sting” of existence. It will take the burdens of thought off your shoulders. It will make you feel like you can fly from the ledge, without wings… It will purport to solve life’s most serious problems. The ironic catch is that the very “sting” and the very “problems” religion can solve are merely fabricated “problems” created by the religion itself.

Here’s what it looks like when you are addicted to Mormonism, when you buy into its fabricated idea that your very being is a problem and therefore you need to keep taking the drug to overcome the “problem.” Gay Mormons who have bought the idea wholesale that acting “gay” is the “problem” part of being a gay Mormon, therefore turn ever more forcefully to the institution that created the “problem” in the first place…

Like a drug, the intoxicating effects cannot last forever. Reason does seep in… You have to increase the dose to stay high, to ward off contradiction. That’s why you’ll find that self-doubting gay men make up some of the highest ranking leaders or most dedicated followers. Gay Mormon men, as you can see here even make some pretty good husbands, as they pour on their straight spouse-loving efforts into a cocktail of bitter and sweet that leaves them feeling an initial high and a most certain hangover. They have to turn to it MORE, give MORE money, marry, serve in callings, bear testimony MORE.

The videos in this Voices of Hope only show the intoxicated and drugged. They leave out the morning after walks of shame that surely occur in quiet, solitary moments for these men and women as something deep inside them whispers that they are pretending.

And, in the end, it will steal their life… But it’s a voluntary trade: accept the lies and illusions in return for mind numbing escape… You can call it truth to make you feel better. What an amazing addiction! A justified, self-righteous numbness and the path to heaven! Meth without societal disapproval! Religion on a “crusade” to justify itself.

PS. This whole Voices of Hope thing is apparently an off-shoot of the North Star effort. I’ve commented several times that I believe otherpro-Mormon, anti-gay online efforts seem to be too slick and too coordinated to be just random Mormons. And I believe Voices of Hope is the glue that connects them all. The videographer for Voices of Hope is the dude here.

When I watch Ty and the others in the video I see drug addicts trying to convince themselves and others that their drug of choice is the answer. I only see pain and co-dependent spouses.

It would be interesting to see who is contributing to their efforts to raise over a million dollars.

Words to live by from the “Queen of Queens” Leah Remini on Dancing With the Stars, October 14, 2013.

Leah Remini had been a lifelong member of The Church of Scientology until earlier this year when she extricated herself from it’s clutches. I’m not sure why she hasn’t been more vocal regarding her reasons or the details that made her feel like escape was necessary and/or a positive direction in her life.

Nevertheless on the October 14th show her assigned dance was to be a contemporary piece to the tune of “Roar” by Katy Perry. The theme for the evening was the most important year in the contestant’s life. Leah chose to ask her professional dance partner to choreograph an interpretive number that would tell the story of her escape from those who controlled her puppet strings.

While not the slickest of dances, it was the best dance of the evening in my opinion. I got goosebumps. I could so relate to the imagery and message of this dance. I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, “There is an incredible joy and peace that comes from living on the outside in a manner that matches how one feels on the inside.”

Watch. I hope anyone who needs to find their strength and find their power agrees.

Jesus is scary when he’s riled. And the only people who rile him are those who, in his own name (what with him being God and all), set themselves up as sanctimonious judges of others.

I think I better go to the weddings of my gay friends. I’m scared not to. While it’s certainly true that in many of his parables it’s unclear what exactly Jesus was saying or meant, he didn’t even almost waffle about his “Love your neighbor as yourself.” He very explicitly declared that injunction the “first and greatest commandment.”

Like this:

(Reposted from June 2011 in response to a question. Be sure and check out parts 1 and 2)

Writings that are directly challenging to conventional thought

The whole”anti” accusation is a tough one to deal with. It gets thrown around a lot in Mormon-land. What makes a book or an author “Anti-Mormon” or “Anti-Christian”?

Most of my Mormon family and acquaintances would throw anything into that category if it contains “faith-damaging” information. Yet, some of the most faith-damaging information is contained in official LDS publications. By using that definition, almost anything spoken by a church leader more than 30 years ago qualifies. In fact, some of the most damaging things I’ve heard or read were spoken or written by the living, modern day church leadership less than 30 years ago.

Boyd K Packer’s talks were the first chips in my firm testimony. Here are a few doozies:

But I think it was The Language of Prayer talk by Dallin Oaks that had my jaw on the floor as I realized for the first time that a leader could be just plain wrong. Then Divine Love delivered by Russell Nelson helped me realize that I didn’t WANT to worship a God whose love was so conditional.

Here’s a few more random LDS prophet treasures which include some ridiculous claims and advice for your reading pleasure:

As much as these talks paint the LDS faith in a silly light, I don’t think anyone would call them “anti.” My definition of “anti” is a little different. I believe it deals with intent and inaccuracy.

I know several historical and doctrinal criticisms of the Catholic church but believing them or even sharing them doesn’t make me “Anti-Catholic.” On my mission I regularly shared some of these facts. Without considering intent, an LDS missionary is essentially “anti” towards every other religion when he or she shares the doctrine of the Apostasy. So, a person can’t be automatically called “anti” when he or she is promoting a version of reality without hate and without animosity. Just because something pisses you off does not make it inaccurate or “anti.”

“You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you mad.” – Aldous Huxley

If I want to take down the Catholic, Mormon or Christian faith and will employ ANY means of factual and imaginary tales to do so, that’s what I consider “anti”. There has to be room for even an atheist to sincerely discuss religion without believers crying persecution.

So, the following books listed are more direct discussions of Religion, Christianity and Mormonism than part 1. The first section lists LDS books and those by LDS authors who claim to remain believers; Or they were at least very faithful at the time they were written. Nevertheless, the facts and the discussions within are far from faithful to the official party line.

And lastly, I’ve listed books that are more direct challenges to the LDS Doctrine and History or Christianity by outsiders that some will consider “anti”. I don’t. Again, I don’t necessarily agree with everything written in every book here. I’d encourage anyone to research and confirm facts all on their own. I did.

The gospel of Jesus Christ clearly says to us as far as the world of truth and fact is concerned, there’s nothing out there to be afraid of. The Latter- day Saint leans into learning with a gusto, or should. -Elder Neal A. Maxwell

If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed. -J. Reuben Clark

Like this:

(Reposted from June 2011 in response to a question. Be sure and check out parts 1 and 2)

I have a really good friend I was visiting the other day who was discussing some of the recent books she’s read. I blurted out that I don’t read much, but then as she listed some of the books she’s read lately I was able to answer, “I’ve read that…read that…read that…check.” So, maybe I do actually read a lot. I always have 2-3 different books I’m reading at a given time. One stays in my briefcase for those times I’m on the road waiting for a plane or eating out alone. Another one remains at my bedside table at home for my evening read just before sleep.

My reading topic choices tend to come in waves… biographies… fiction… non-fiction… religious… humor… biographies… non-fiction, etc… I’ll stick with a genre for a month or two before I burn out and move on to my next area of interest.

Reading is both a source of entertainment and information to me. More than anything, over the last few years reading has been a source of self-confidence in my life path. I don’t have a label for my beliefs, but I can say that reading has been extremely helpful in determining that it’s better to NOT know everything than to be cocksure certain about what is true. It really is accurate that the more you learn the more you realize you don’t know. I try now to stick with the old adage “Seek those who seek, doubt those who find.”

It’s therefore curious to me that the most confidently certain, knowing people I am acquainted with are the people who read the least. And when they do read, they almost exclusively read the topics that support their current beliefs. I at least try not to do this.

I think that that was my downfall as a Mormon actually… that I was never afraid to search and read things that contradicted my beliefs. I, of course, had the confidence that the truth had no challenge that could not be addressed and answered. That’s another reason that I refrain from labeling myself today as an atheist or whatever. I’m open to changing my worldview the more I learn.

I understand that not everyone feels that way. When something overtly challenges their belief structure it can be extremely offensive and intimidating.

So, for part 1 of my book recommendations, I have decided to list the non-fiction books that helped me question my original beliefs even though these have little to no direct connection to Mormonism. In other words, I don’t believe these are “anti” anything. In listing books here I’m not even saying that I agree with 100% that is written inside, but they did challenge me to think. They opened my eyes to a way of thinking about facts and the world around me that I hadn’t encountered before. A couple of the authors included here are well-know atheists but I found these particular books to be their earlier or less confrontational writings.

These would be books that I wouldn’t have had to read covertly as a Mormon, or books that peers of mine have certainly read and come to different conclusions (in other words, they stayed Mormon); but they challenged me to question that world.

I suspected this would happen when I moved closer to the children. It just happened sooner than I thought it would.

My ex-wife called today and at the end of our conversation she brought up the reason she had really called.

Now that you are nearby, the kids want to go to church even on the weekends they are with you. It’s no different than them participating in an extra-curricular activity. You can take them and then I’ll bring them back after the 3 hour block.

First of all, my feelings and stance regarding the LDS faith were one of the main reasons for our divorce. My taking them to church implies a support that I’m not willing to give.

Secondly, SHE wants them to attend church weekly. It’s dubious whether or not it is the kids’ desire or not. I learned long ago that the children will say to each of us what they think the other wants to hear. They want to go to church when they are with her. With me, they love sleeping in and doing fun things on Sunday.

I believe I owe it to my kids for my weekends to be indoctrination-free.

Lastly, is it really fair to expect me to give up 4 hours of my weekends with my kids to lug them to a place that teaches them false and demeaning things about me as a gay man? Would she cart them to a Post-Mormon group meeting on her time if I regularly attended one?

My only worry is one day becoming a vehicle for their faith-promoting myth about how their ex-Mormon dad prevented them from attending church but how they patiently and faithfully endured until the day that they could attend every week… How many times have we heard that sort of story? The new convert whose parents wouldn’t let her get baptized at 14 so she had to wait until she turned 18 and then she’s as Molly Mormon as they get now.

My gut is still telling me to say no. Sundays with me are family time.

This all came about because Sunday is the Primary program in the ward, and my ex-wife saw that as a window to this discussion. I said that since it was my time and this was something special that I’d take them to Sacrament Meeting, see them and then we could leave together. When I later talked to my 8 year old on the phone she sounded excited that she wouldn’t have to stay for the 3 hours.

But my ex-wife countered that our oldest son had just been called at Teacher’s Quorum President and so he wanted to be there each week to fulfill his obligation. The truth is that I think he more than anyone appreciates sleeping in on Sundays with me because he has to get up early each weekday due to participating in the Seminary program. He and they knew of the custody arrangement before they issued the call and when he accepted it so they obviously felt like they could operate within those boundaries.

I’ll continue to agree to take the kids to church on rare on special occasions, but I feel like it’s my right and my duty to minimize the indoctrination that they experience, not to encourage and aid it along. Even if that makes me out as the bad guy. My other thought of compromise is to say that perhaps at age 16 when they can drive themselves they can choose to attend or not even if they are with me that weekend.

What would you do? What have you done? Anyone out there solve this conflict in any creative ways?

Like this:

Imagine if you will that at 19 years old you make a lifelong commitment to a way of coloring your life. From that point on every activity, every friendship you develop, every family choice you nurture and every goal in your life is colored by the stroke of one paintbrush. That lifestyle paintbrush is colored with the tint of antique sepia. It seems old, trustworthy and 100% authentic.

Fast forward to the age of 40 when you’ve come to realize the folly of grasping so tightly to that paintbrush that you were handed at age 19. You want, no, you need a new paintbrush. You want color in your life because the sepia doesn’t live up to its reputation and promise of authenticity. You’ve come to see and know the true color that has always lain within you that the sepia has only succeeded in masking and preserving – not eliminating.

After all, sepia really only indicates decay and lack of authenticity. Colors have always been around. We just didn’t have the ability, the technology or now we don’t have the desire to see them. If we were able to travel back in time, I think the biggest shock would be how colorful and non traditional everything was. Objects weren’t black and white or sepia toned.

Sepia is a chemical treatment to preserve a black and white photograph for archival purposes. It is neither true to color nor authentic. It does increase the longevity of a photograph but it cripples our present view using a handicap that was only necessary in the past.

Once I transitioned to my life of color at age 40, everything I had created or nurtured in sepia for 20 years effectively disappeared.

Friends.

Family members.

Acquaintances.

Life habits, processes and lifestyles.

Where once my skill with coloring life in sepia was shared admired and respected, my interest in color is now seen as vulgar, non-traditional and deviant.

Inside my heart I know true to life rainbow of colors is right for me, but I don’t know how to color in these rich new tones. The choices are endless and sometimes that variety leaves me feeling paralyzed. I lack confidence. Sometimes I pick the wrong color. Everyone around me now has been coloring for 46 years, but I’ve only been at it for 6.

I feel like a child with crayons among adults with canvasses of watercolors, acrylics and oils. It’s thrilling and terrifying at the same time.

Trying to grasp onto anything familiar, I reach back to the time before I narrowed my life down to sepia and reach out to those past friends with whom I dabbled in crayons as a child. They too have been operating with color for 46 years now. They don’t get my awkwardness with it. They offer occasional kind words of encouragement and the renewal of their friendship is warm and inviting.

But I don’t tell them the magnitude of my fear and loneliness. I feel like I’m beginning all over again with nobody by my side, having lost a great deal.

I don’t hate the life of sepia that I lived and I don’t understand why those who stick with it seem to despise me. There is no place for color in a sepia world. I’m willing to acknowledge that sepia may be right for some folks, but I don’t believe it is unquestionably the color for everyone. I see bright neon and pastel colors in my children and I want to scream at them to look around and recognize the rich variety of life while they have a chance to experience it. But a force more powerful than me is tightening their grip around that sepia paintbrush and it pains me to see their stern glazed-over sepia faces take shape.

Even today I am hurting over my awkwardness with color and wanting my children to experience it early on like I never had the chance.

I want to find someone with whom I can explore color and not feel ashamed or embarrassed at my occasional mismatching or fear of some colors. I haven’t found that person.

I understand but I’m dismayed when I hear of someone who elects to turn the lights out rather than be exposed to to the dreary, miserable and lonely colors that come with a full palette. I also sometimes feel like I am drowning in new colors and just want some of my old sepia friends, family and respect back.

But I really don’t.

Once you experience color, you see it and want it everywhere. My choice, ugly consequences and all, is real and authentic. Choosing color was my proudest moment and yet it remains my most difficult life challenge.